# Unveiling Trust in Multimodal Large Language Models: Evaluation, Analysis, and Mitigation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15370 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.15370/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 84 of its 101 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Aug 2025.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/mllm-jailbreaks-and-adversarial-robustness/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 84)

- [High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.10752/) (2021)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1405.0312/) (2014)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Mistral 7B](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06825/) (2023)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [InstructBLIP: Towards General-purpose Vision-Language Models with Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06500/) (2023)
- [MiniGPT-4: Enhancing Vision-Language Understanding with Advanced Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.10592/) (2023)
- [InternVL: Scaling up Vision Foundation Models and Aligning for Generic Visual-Linguistic Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14238/) (2023)
- [Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.00837/) (2016)
- [MMBench: Is Your Multi-modal Model an All-around Player?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.06281/) (2023)
- [MMMU: A Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16502/) (2023)
- [Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14219/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Object Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10355/) (2023)
- [MME: A Comprehensive Evaluation Benchmark for Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13394/) (2023)
- [Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.08573/) (2019)
- [Microsoft COCO Captions: Data Collection and Evaluation Server](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1504.00325/) (2015)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [ShareGPT4V: Improving Large Multi-Modal Models with Better Captions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12793/) (2023)
- [SEED-Bench: Benchmarking Multimodal LLMs with Generative Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16125/) (2023)
- [StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.09456/) (2020)
- [Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20330/) (2024)
- [BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.04657/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [DeceptionBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for AI Deception Behaviors in Real-world Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.15501/) (2025)
- [Towards Safe Reasoning in Large Reasoning Models via Corrective Intervention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24393/) (2025)
- [LLaVAShield: Safeguarding Multimodal Multi-Turn Dialogues in Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.25896/) (2025)
- [Beyond Correctness: Benchmarking and Aligning Response Behaviors in Hybrid-Thinking MLLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.12781/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The trustworthiness of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) remains an intense concern despite the significant progress in their capabilities. Existing evaluation and mitigation approaches often focus on narrow aspects and overlook risks introduced by the multimodality. To tackle these challenges, we propose MultiTrust-X, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating, analyzing, and mitigating the trustworthiness issues of MLLMs. We define a three-dimensional framework, encompassing five trustworthiness aspects which include truthfulness, robustness, safety, fairness, and privacy; two novel risk types covering multimodal risks and cross-modal impacts; and various mitigation strategies from the perspectives of data, model architecture, training, and inference algorithms. Based on the taxonomy, MultiTrust-X includes 32 tasks and 28 curated datasets, enabling holistic evaluations over 30 open-source and proprietary MLLMs and in-depth analysis with 8 representative mitigation methods. Our extensive experiments reveal significant vulnerabilities in current models, including a gap between trustworthiness and general capabilities, as well as the amplification of potential risks in base LLMs by both multimodal training and inference. Moreover, our controlled analysis uncovers key limitations in existing mitigation strategies that, while some methods yield improvements in specific aspects, few effectively address overall trustworthiness, and many introduce unexpected trade-offs that compromise model utility. These findings also provide practical insights for future improvements, such as the benefits of reasoning to better balance safety and performance. Based on these insights, we introduce a Reasoning-Enhanced Safety Alignment (RESA) approach that equips the model with chain-of-thought reasoning ability to discover the underlying risks, achieving state-of-the-art results.